|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
August 23rd, 2007, 10:04 AM | #76 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paris
Posts: 72
|
Quote:
very great pictures ! is that from a HD200 ? i don't see any noise at all ! what settings did you used to achieve this ? i don't really understand why does dark areas produce noise... why don't the camera take it as is that's all ? :D |
|
August 23rd, 2007, 04:11 PM | #77 |
Major Player
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 320
|
That was from an HD100 with the PT3 settings using Standard gamma. I don't know why the noise is there sometimes. But I do know that if you expose well (above 50IRE) that you will get cleaner images. But sometimes it has to be dark and I guess that's when you roll the dice. ;-)
|
August 28th, 2007, 05:18 PM | #78 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: May 2004
Location: tampa fl
Posts: 92
|
This is great info to hear about. So was there a total tally number of F stops of light lost with the adapter and such?
Thanks Chad for the updates! Tony B. |
August 28th, 2007, 05:44 PM | #79 |
Major Player
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 320
|
Roy,
I've rated my HD100 + Brevis + 2.8 lens at 125 ASA. I include the prime lens in there because I almost always leave it at 2.8 so it's more or less a fixed setting and I adjust the stock lens iris. I've read that the JVC alone is about 320ASA which would make the adapter + lens a stop and a half slower. One interesting note is that I have never gained any real amount of light by opening the prime lens up to even a 1.2. In my experience it's the same whether you're at a 1.4 or 2.8 with the Brevis. Curious I know, but I wonder what others have experienced with this or other adapters. |
September 23rd, 2007, 12:35 PM | #80 | |
Trustee
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: London UK
Posts: 1,939
|
Quote:
|
|
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|